arthuroreplying to lord/global/fonk…only gives him an oppotunity to exist and then we should bear its boring and full of insult posts.
Don’t feed the troll.
PS :I warned the moderators.
arthuroScarabe replaced by Damocles integration : – 500 g
the scarabe datalink has been replaced by the “decalco” system for the F3 which is a kind of scarabe but now fully integrated to the rafale weapon system. The sacarabe was a kind of patch work, first tested on the mirage 2000D to answer to specific CAS needs. (share pictures, text and videos with forces on the ground). It worked in parallel of the rafale weapon system. Scarabe was an AdA development they did with their own ressources. The decalco is a fully developped and integrated datalink and system.
arthuroWell I disagree, aviators are not children screaming for more fun, they can understand that more range or more maintenance friendly engines are more relevant than an increase of power.And they perfecty understood that. Since the AdA and its pilots think the rafale is already very powerful they prefer being able to have even more combat persistance.
Performance is also about sustainability: you can design an aircraft with a Trust to weight ratio of three but which will be always short of fuel whan the fight begins.
Well the F35 should not offer the best handling characteristics in fact even worse than some of the teen, but it will be eventually able to dominate everything (exept the F22)…So sheer power is oversimplistic to determine an aircraft performance knowing that all of them already offer exellent trust to weight ratios…Stealth, EW, missiles, situation awarness are much more decisive factors now…The time were aircraft manufacturer were racing behind machs is over. Better let the missile do the job than making some painful compromise about the aircraft design.
For instance, I talked with some rafale pilots who did red flag, in paris a few weeks ago. They told me that rafale main assets comparing to the Su30 mki and F15K were the sennd sor fusion and the situation awarness it provides. This helped them taking the right decision very quickly and perform better than those two platforms because their pilots didn’t have the same situation awerness level and had to take precious moments to form a mental image of what was going on. So you can have mach 2+ aircrafts with huge radar, if you can’t have the right picture of the battle situation you are a sitting duck.
http://forum.keypublishing.co.uk/showthread.php?t=80325&page=17 (comments and a personal picture from me reply 506)
as for the rafale in greece, I only saw rumors on another board (defense talk) from a guy like Globalpress but it was never back up. The only document I saw was about Spectra, sensor fusion…I think you know this document as you already told me…
arthurosome links to back up my claims from the various rafale threads :
a rafale vs F16 ( 1 vs 1 WVR gun dogfight) in the united state TV report :
http://videos.tf1.fr/video/news/0,,3…x-combat-.html
the result : 6 f16 shot down for 2 rafale during the first day.
The american pilot says that the rafale has some unique capabilities and it is a much more agressive dogfighter than the f16 but in the end it is the pilot’s experience which is decisive in this type of engagement
A NEW RAFALE VS F18 DOGFIGHT VIDEO (with beautiful cokpit/HUD footage and radio comunication)
The nice part of the video beginns at 3 minutes
about rafale power…From a post on military photos by a Nellis spotter (rapier 55) :
http://www.militaryphotos.net/forums…=137433&page=8Xav, thanks for posting the video (2nd). I think I also put it up in the Pic/Video Section, though I’m not sure. I’ve uploaded so many videos lately I’ve lost track. Also, they’re all shot in HD, just click the link.
Originally Posted by arthuro
(the speaker/journalist also says that the american pilots were impressed by rafale power by the way…)I have to agree with this assessment. After watching a number of aircraft launch from Red Flag I was impressed with the power the Rafale exhibited on takeoff. The high pitch and continuous climb was unbelievable. I won’t quote anybody but in many aspects people were more amazed by the Rafale’s capabilities than with the Eurofighters
Colonel François Moussez, a pilot who has flown 150 hours on the Rafale, said that two could do the work of six existing air superiority/defense and air-to-surface attack jets. “With the Rafale,” he said, “we can do simultaneous multimission management: air-to-air, air-to- ground, reconnaissance at the same time.”
Moussez said that in dogfight exercises, the Rafale had outflown F-15, F-16 and F-18 opponents, and in technical and performance evaluations “we have systematically won against the F-15 and the Eurofighter Typhoon.”
attachement “the rafale is more powerful than the F16 is the whole flight envelop”
arthuroThe rafale is in no way under powered, it is quite the opposite in fact..All the discussion I had with rafale pilots (4 of them in total) praise the rafale power and handling which already give the rafale a clear edge against all of the teen fighters. It can supercruise with 1*1000l and 4 AAM.
The rafale is already extremely powerful , and the AdA doesn’t need more power since it would not make sens for them and prefer extending the life span and the maintenance of the engine rather than a power increase.
I had a direct conversation with one of dassault’s top executive and hewas very clear about that…More range and more maintenance friendly is better than an engine trust increase…
reply to your edit : it is because the AdA doesn’t want it ! not because of the costs…
arthurogreg,
I don’t think Rom un is lord/Global whatever…!
arthuroIn industry, ‘checked the feasibility’ mean that there is a prototype or a POC (proof of contest).
In industry, we make a difference between ‘check feasibility’ and ‘study the feasibility’.
That why Dassault say :Quote:
The possibility of developing an engine developing 90 kN of thrust with reheat has been demonstrated.And ‘demonstrated’ did’nt mean a powerpoint presentation. I don’t understand why this debate.
+1
I don’t understand the debate also:confused: To check or demonstrate something in the industry is not ony wishfull thinking but real testing…
They must have pushed the M88 ECO at 9t on a banch and follow the parameters and concluded it was fine…
In fact it shouldn’t have costed a lot since they only had to take one or some of the M88-ECO test engines available and push them at 9 t….
arthurodespite being a rafale enthusiast, I prefer being frank than being blind…
A platform may be better than another depending of the criterium of an evaluation there is nothing new with that…Here the swiss as a neutral country, mostly aims to do point defense missions…Scramble and intercept…It is exactly what the typhoon has been desingn for although they added some multirole capabilities after, seeing that the world has changed.
If a country (which would like to have a global reach) was searching for an aircraft which could perform a wide range of missions, carry a lot of ordinnance with a comfortable range and a good survivability then the rafale is the one to go ! I am thinking of India or brazil for instance…
But for point defense the typhoon is a more apropriate platform, although the rafale would not be bad at this task…The question is now to know if the gap will be close enough in this field (Air defense: 50%) so that the rafale will compensate on AtG (20%) and recce (20%) of the evaluation. In these last two areas the rafale should come out first quite easely…So there is still some suspense…!
arthuroAs far as the swiss evaluation is concerned, I would now give the typhoon an edge for a few reasons (my two cents) :
-The swiss want mainly an aircraft for sky policing (point defense), and the typhoon is taylored for that role since it was concieved to intercept warsaw pact fighters…What an irony after the collapse of the soviet union for an aircraft which has a strong cold war design origin and seemed a bit outdated in its concept!
This area represents 50% of the performance evaluation. I don’t doubt that the typhoon should have exeled in that role like the supersonic interception of the F18.
-It has an HMS which is a stong point for these kind of missions.
-In terms of cost, although the rafale is cheaper the swiss should include the costs of buying micas…The typhoon can already take AMRAM and (sidewinders) ?
-Last but not least, 3 out of the 4 swiss neighbours operate the typhoon.
On the other hand, for this mission the rafale can boast to have a better radar and EW (AESA) as well as a better combat endurance, but I doubt it will make up for the the better kinetics of the typhoon.
Since long range AtG missions are not the priority for the Swiss Air force for obvious reasons, rafale main competitive advantage vanishes…Besides I don’t see the swiss buying loads of AASM and SCALP cruise missles…If you look at the typical F18 and F5 configuration, they only bring a drop tank or two with one or two AA missiles…
And I don’t think the gripen will win hear since performance (60% of the evaluation) is more important than costs…
arthuroSens,
It is not the case between the F2 and the F3, power processing and power supply is unchanged. They sipmly anticipated the upgrade (F2 arrived in 2006 and F3 in 2008 so this is common sense). That is why 90% of the work is software related. Only a few items have been changed, notably the mission recorder. So I really don’t think there are any weight related issue between those standards. Perhaps between the F1 and the F2 (they added the FSO), but certainly not between the F2 and F3.
arthuroSens,
it takes approximatively two weeks to upgrade an F2 to an F3 standard. The longest thing is to do is to treat obsolecenses…by changing some of the hardware like I said. But changing a chip won’t change anything in terms of weight… I think I read that there were also some rewiring like for the exocet. But most of the improvement of the F3 come from the softwares, even if it doesn’t represent the longest part of the upgrade.
If there was an increase in weight, something I never read about but I could have missed something, I don’t think it is related to different standards.
Jackoniko : avoid the flame with global/lord whatever please, it will spare us some loads of insults and boring posts.
arthurofor how many times should we bear this guy…? please ignore him.
arthuroBe careful between the Rafale F2 and F3, there is many pure software modification, specially around SPECTRA.
+1
The F3 standard is mostly a big software upgrade, and with some obsolecences treatments to have up to date hardware… So a possible weight increase should not be connected to these “blocks”, or at least marginally…In fact they are replacing some analogical hardware by numerical hardware (like the mission recorder) so it should even reduce the weight in some cases.
arthuropress release :
Successful first test firing of Thales’ new Laser-Guided Air-to-Ground Rocket
12 novembre 2008
On 8 October, TDA, a Thales subsidiary specialized in combat systems and munitions, successfully fired its first laser-guided rocket.
On 8 October, TDA, a Thales subsidiary specialized in combat systems and munitions, successfully fired its first laser-guided rocket, as part of a DGA (French Defense Procurement Agency) assessment program. Conducted at the CELM[1] test center, the test firing was the first of a series planned for 2008 and 2009. The operational objective for the French armed forces – Army and Air Force – is to have, by 2013, a 68mm rocket that can hit targets with “metric precision” and reduced collateral effects.At stake in the program was validation of the performance of a 68-mm laser-guided rocket for use in the same launchers as the unguided air-to-ground rocket of the same caliber now widely used on TIGRE helicopters. Intended in particular to hit lightly armored fixed and mobile targets and infrastructure, this new type of high-precision rocket will complete the existing line of munitions, already capable of performing numerous missions such as:
– Close fire support,
– Search and destroy missions of enemy ground-to-air defense,
– Surveillance and coastal defense against light craft,
– Target marking for the artillery
In addition to its integrated laser-designation guidance/control system, the new rocket includes the same advanced technological features as the unguided rocket, among them the programming, ignition by induction and tamperproofing functions.
According to Guy Lefebvre, CEO of Thales TDA: “This new rocket with its metric precision will reduce the vulnerability of the carriers while greatly increasing the airborne destruction capability, all for a much lower cost than a missile. In short, it perfectly meets the new needs of the armed forces.”
In 2006, Thales had already fired rockets with GPS-enhanced accuracy, in the 68-mm and 2.75″ (70mm) caliber. Having succeeded at 68 mm, Thales is now in a position to assess, with its Belgian subsidiary, a 2.75″ laser-guided rocket concept. A firing with this caliber is scheduled for mid-November.
arthuroI bought the latest air fan and they made an article to take stock of the F3 standard and futher upgrades.
some news (I don’t post what is already known)
-The CEAM (military testing) should fully qualify the damocles pod this fall.
-Rockets integration are in the pipe…The canon interface and programme is already available to support them. The rocket capability was asked after the rafale tour in afghanistan
And in Air & cosmos they made an article of the first TDA laser guided rocket test (8 october)….There is a picture of the firing in this newspaper p 29. range is between 5000 and 7000 meters whan fired from an aircraft.
Sign In
